Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to raise with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the urgent need to address the concerns regarding the wall height at the proposed flood defence project between the Wooden Bridge and Causeway Road in Dublin 3.

Last Wednesday night at 7.30 p.m. in Clontarf Castle hotel, more than 600 people attended a public meeting on the proposed wall planned for near St. Anne's Park and overlooking Dublin Bay. The high turnout highlighted the anger over any attempt to damage a public amenity. I called the meeting to hear the views on the proposed flood defence wall. There was never any agreement with local residents, local businesses or the joint working groups on the wall height, which is why there are major concerns. The project was originally billed as a cycleway and assurances were given for a minor wall. I am opposed to the current wall and its design. It destroys a major public amenity and damages the scenic view of Dublin Bay and Bull Island.

Dublin Bay is protected by nine special areas of conservation. Why is there no aesthetic finish to this wall? Thousands of people enjoy this environment each day. Why would anyone want to damage such scenic beauty? It seems to be a continuous battle to get Dublin City Council to realise the importance of Dublin Bay. There seems to be a cultural view that concrete is the answer to everything. Dublin City Council has a record of some bad decisions as a result of not listening to the people. Is Dublin City Council concerned about its future working relationship with the joint working group or in respect of progressing flood defence work on this and future promenade projects? A commitment was given by senior engineers that the wall would be no higher than the stone wall leading to the Wooden Bridge. Why was this commitment not adhered to? The local independent councillor, Damian O'Farrell, had motions agreed by Dublin City Council that called on the council to preserve the amenity and protect the environment in any future flood defence plan. Why was this ignored?

I have worked on Dublin Bay matters previously over the duration of my political career. I was honoured to be endorsed by the late great Seán Dublin Bay Loftus. That tradition goes on. I am well aware of the position Dublin Bay and Bull Island hold in our community. Either one or the other is designated as a UNESCO biosphere, a nature reserve, a special protection area under the EU birds directive or a special area of conservation. I will be damned if I let anything happen to this local and national amenity.

Another important aspect relates to how no consideration was given to the wheelchair-bound population, although both the Irish Wheelchair Association and the Central Remedial Clinic are based in Clontarf. At our meeting on Wednesday night, a young wheelchair-bound man made a poignant remark to the effect that while the able-bodied might have some chance of seeing over the wall, no consideration was given to wheelchair users who would never have that ability.

The day after our public meeting I attended a meeting in City Hall with the city manager, officials, engineers and councillors. Councillor Damian O'Farrell and I put the views of the local residents on the wall and Dublin Bay. Councillor O'Farrell succeeded in getting a special city council meeting tomorrow at 6.15 p.m. All I ask is for the Minister, the city manager and senior officials to listen to the views of the local residents and have sensible flood defence measures that protect local people but also enhance beautiful Dublin Bay.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising the issue and for giving me the opportunity, on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, to outline the position regarding Dollymount promenade and the associated flood protection project.

As the Deputy will be aware, under section 30 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 the Minister, Deputy Kelly, is specifically precluded from exercising any power or control in respect of any planning case under consideration by any planning authority, including An Bord Pleanála.

The management of the Dollymount promenade and the associated flood protection project is a matter for the relevant planning authority, which is Dublin City Council in this instance, and the Minister has no function or remit in this regard.

From inquiries made with Dublin City Council, I understand that this project, comprising a promenade and cycleway proposal as well as flood alleviation works to address higher tides and sea levels, was originally approved by An Bord Pleanála in 2011 under section 226 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, relating to foreshore developments. The environmental impact of the project was comprehensively assessed as part of this process. Dublin City Council subsequently made some alterations to the promenade and cycleway aspects of its proposals which were progressed under the Part VIII requirements of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as amended, relating to local authority developments.

The Part VIII process for local authority development works involves extensive public notice, public consultation, including with prescribed bodies, and the public display of plans and other documentation, with the proposed development ultimately being subject to the will of the elected members of the local authority concerned. As required under the Part VIII provisions, the revised proposals for the Dollymount promenade and flood protection project was the subject of extensive public consultation with the local community generally and with local community groups. The National Parks and Wildlife Service was also consulted on the preparation of the proposal and habitat screening. Planning approval for the revised proposals was granted by Dublin City Council in May 2013.

I understand that the specific works proposed under the project include sea wall repairs and the insertion of a flood defence wall up to a maximum height of 4.25 m, which the council has indicated is the minimum recommended to protect this area of coastline. The council has advised that these flood defence works will mean that 30% of the existing sea wall will remain at its current high level, 10% will be raised by between 1 and 8 inches, a further 32% will be raised by 8 inches to 1 ft. 4 in., with the remaining 28% raise in height by between 1 ft. 4 in. to 2 ft. 3 in., which will be the maximum height increase on any part of the flood defence wall.

The proposed works are being undertaken against the background of the need to address the realities associated with adaptation to climate change and the putting in place of necessary flood risk management measures to address this phenomenon. There are many areas of the country, including cities and towns, which are at risk from periodic flooding, and Dollymount promenade is seen to be particularly at risk as a result of rising tides and increasing sea levels.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State can come back to the rest of his reply.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are only two lines left.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The works on the Dollymount promenade project have commenced. By their nature such works will, though kept to a minimum, create some disruption in the area while ongoing. However, the council considers that when complete, these works will have significant benefits in the context of improved cycling and walking amenities and protection against flood risks in the area.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his response, but I disagree with him and Dublin City Council on this project. The name of the project was very misleading. It was called the Sutton to Sandycove scheme, which received approval in 2013 in an interim works project. It comprised elements of two schemes, one of which was the Dollymount promenade and flood protection project which received An Bord Pleanála approval in 2011. The Minister of State should also note that the conditions of that approval still apply to this interim project as far as flood defences go.

Condition No. 5 clearly states that an environmental and liaison committee shall be established with the local community representatives. It would appear that this has not happened and Dublin City Council may be in breach of An Bord Pleanála planning conditions. If this is the case, this is a very serious matter. I call on the city manager, Mr. Keegan, to make a statement on this matter. At a recent information meeting with councillors, Dublin City Council admitted that it was its intention to build the sea wall in question higher than the 4.25 m permission granted in Part VIII of the approval in 2013.

The other issue is that, as I said, it was called the S2S Cycleway & Footway Interim Works: Bull Road to Causeway Road. There was no mention of the term "flood" in the title. Section 371 on page 11 deals with flood defence measures, but the most important section is section 48 on page 25 which refers to the wall and states that it will be only slightly higher than the level of the footpath. The page also contains a drawing. Dublin City Council has refused to meet residents and local groups and also gave a very misleading report. The people of the northside are very angry about this wall. We support the cycleway and want anti-flood measures but we want them to be decently done and to ensure that they do not destroy our lovely bay.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is obviously a lot of common ground in the Deputy's response to my reply. The reality is that the Minister does not have any part to play in this. Flooding was a real problem in Clonmel and Carrick-on-Suir. The residents were very concerned when the project was being carried out, but when it was finished the effect it had on the area was unbelievable. I do not know anything about the area to which the Deputy refers, but I would advise the residents that some misleading information can be given out by people and there can be some misunderstanding of the value and benefit of the project. There is a role for Dublin City Council in terms of better explanation to people of what is happening and the long-term benefits of the project. I will relate the concerns of the Deputy to the Minister.